Deb, that's what "comps" are. Unfortunately, it's difficult to find that information, without paying for expensive software. As far as parsing out the outliers, that's not particularly difficult, given a sufficient sample size- meaning, if you look at enough similar properties, there's a handful that will stick out like sore thumbs that can be discarded.
Charles, I wish you had messaged a little earlier this morning. I was actually in Tampa this morning and saw your response once I was about halfway home. Here's my issue with your comment though "the numbers will tell you if a deal is worth looking at." What does that mean though? How? I get that, at face value, the asking price needs to be sufficiently south of the market value price, so create enough equity in the deal to cover expenses, risks, and to make enough money to make it worth one's time. However, what do you compare the asking price to, if zestimates etc. are considered worthless AND without having to fork out over $100/ month for access to software to then have to do an even more complex statistical analysis to determine that average price?
Dan and Matthew, I have to respectfully disagree with you there. Just jumping in, without having sufficient knowledge is horrible advice. Yes, I understand the concept of "analysis paralysis" as Matthew C mentions, but there's a balance between getting stuck in the tar pit of analysis and gaining a sufficient baseline of knowledge. Yes, no one can plan for EVERYTHING that could go south, but one can work on mitigating "enough" of those permutations to make the risk reasonable. I'm sure no one works on a plan for a meteor striking the earth and wiping out all of humanity, but it's reasonable enough to want to know what would happen if there's another housing crash like we had in 2008. While statistically speaking we're overdue for both, but one is far more likely than the other, and it isn't unreasonable to want to have a contingency plan for things that are relatively likely to go south.
The fact of the matter, is that I'm new. I've done just enough learning and research to know where some of the holes in my knowledge base are. I don't think I'm falling prey to analysis paralysis by wanting to make sure the most biggest holes are patched before I jump in.
As for good deals, I haven't been told by anyone that there's a lack of good deals at the moment. To be frank, my issue is actually quite the opposite. From the listings I've looked up so far, I just haven't seen anything that was particularly impressive. Granted my range is a bit small so far- I've been looking from Bradenton up to a bit north of Brooksville, but I just haven't found much that impresses me.
Here's a theory that I'd like to bounce off of all of you- zestimates, etc. are said to be inaccurate in that outliers can artificially inflate the median price, making a given property appear to be a better deal than it actually is. However, I wonder if this works in the opposite direction as well, in that outliers would pull a median price down sufficiently to obfuscate potential deals into making them seem that they're not as good as they actually are. For example, in the area that I'm looking for average criteria I've put out- 3+ br, 250k max, the houses I've seen listed have all been OVER the zestimate price. So... does this mean that all of these estimates are wrong, or is it that the market is just a buyers market now, in that there are more buyers than homes, driving the cost up? And as such, does that mean that it's not a good time to buy if we're at the top of the market, and it would behoove oneself to wait until the inevitable bust, and prices drop? Thoughts?
